Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 14 votes

The Stupendous Gmc Jam #14 Discussion Topic

chat

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
1209 replies to this topic

#1201 Lukan Spellweaver

Lukan Spellweaver

    Gay Wizard Freak & mcmonkey's plaything

  • GMC Member
  • 3704 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 20 May 2014 - 11:14 PM

Some people like to do full scale reviews. Where they play through multiple times to rate every aspect of the game. I usually do this, but this time around I had personal matters, so I did one play passes. Those one play passes took three days to complete... Having only a week to review the games is not long enough, if I had had more personal time to do the reviews, I probably would have used the whole two weeks for in-depth reviews.

 

But I get to write some in-depth reviews for the Indie Beacon anyway, so I'm happy.


  • 1

DeEuDARh.pngi1SR21Q.png

Find me on Itch.io | GameJolt | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Ask.FM

 GMC Google Hangout | I liek monkehs

The GMC, here lies she. Kicked to the curb, with nary a word. She shall live on, though. Remain strong, bros.

Also: MIKE DAILLY TOLD ME TO UPDATE MY SIGNATURE


#1202 mr magnus

mr magnus

    Viking King

  • GMC Member
  • 3739 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 21 May 2014 - 01:33 AM

All right; During the next jam I'll be working. I work a hard job from 7AM to 4PM if I am lucky, more often than not I have to do overtime and in a worst case scenario I'm home around 11PM. At that time I'll eat and be completely worn out and exhausted. alongside that I have social life to tend to, a puppy to maintain and personal projects that I do deem more important than games. I also cannot afford the luxury to stay up late because waking up 6 in the morning to do a difficult job isn't something you want to do when you're tired.

 

 A man like me tends to take great pride and detail in his work and as such I'll require at least  10 minutes each game and 5 minutes for the review. This time will increase if the game is good or I need a better view of it. if we assume a lazy 50 game jam that means I'll need 12 and a half hour minimal to finish rating and reviewing, with a margin of error of, say, 7 hours. 

 

I don't have that sort of time to play; Last summer the first week of my job was literally like this:

Wake up.
Work.

Do overtime to 10PM
come home, eat, crash into my bed and die there.

wake up

work

do overtime to 10PM
E.t.c

That was a really hard week, nothing in the plant went correctly and the first day I worked there an entire (around 2500 cans) of yoghurt where incorrectly labeled and we had to manually place new lids on the cans. 


After a day like that I'm sleeping. Nothing else. Not even bothering to turn on my computer.

so, a requirement to rank all games WILL end up in fast, dishonest votes OR a large drop in voters we've been struggling to get voters to begin with. We need more voters, not less as a requirement like that will result in. 


Edited by mr magnus, 21 May 2014 - 01:36 AM.

  • 5

#1203 Shadowrend

Shadowrend

    Master of Shadows

  • GMC Member
  • 3071 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 21 May 2014 - 09:00 AM

Next to none, they describe just about the same thing. It's just about the difference between America and U.S.A. One is a bit more precise than the other.


I beg to differ, America is the entire continent consisting of North and South America and their islands, while the USA is a country in the northern continent.
  • 0

#1204 GameDevDan

GameDevDan

    RIP current GMC

  • Global Moderators
  • 1453 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 21 May 2014 - 09:27 AM

We use the Alterative vote method ( more commonly known as instant-runoff voting) because it allows us to vote for as many games as we want with minimal effect on those games we didn't choose. It is more accurate than the 12 point system but as with all voting systems it becomes less accurate the further down the runner up list we head, but it mostly eliminates ties at the bottom half of the list if even one bothers to rank all of the games.

+The following conversation


Just to clear this up:
 

What we actually used is a botched Instant run-off system. Instant run-off isn't designed to create runners up, only an outright winner. In ordinary political instant-run off you could have 4 candidates. The first three all get a whole bunch of first place votes and everybody who votes for them first gives the last party their second place vote. Because the last party didn't get a single first place vote, he is knocked out of the running in the first round of counting when in reality, since all voters chose him as their second favourite, he is the best choice for everybody. Scale this up to a bunch of jam games where say, 20 entries don't get a first place vote and technically we'd have 20 games tying for last place with nothing to separate them, and a game who got a whole bunch of second and third place votes but no first place vote would instantly be stopped from getting first place. So the form we used previously was a bastardised version of instant run-off to ensure that votes for lower places actually make a difference.

 

This jam, I didn't count using instant run-off at all. I used 1/vote. The result would have been much the same, as the top few entries were runaways from the rest, particularly Blake's, which was miles ahead of even second place. 1/Vote means all entries have a points total. For every ranking they are given they get 1 point divided by the rank number added to their points total. So for example if a game comes 5th, it gets 1/5 or 0.2 added to its total. Not only is the nicer and quicker for the person running the jam to calculate (with less room for human error) but it also eliminates the oddities caused by the technical political IRV method mentioned above and it actually separates more places in the list. Notice that not a single entry tied this jam. If you don't like the way that turned out I'll go back to doing it the old way, or we can come up with a new way that you guys may prefer.


  • 6

See you all on the other side.

Back & share :)


#1205 smash ball

smash ball

    Volcanic Light

  • GMC Member
  • 2389 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 21 May 2014 - 07:57 PM

Next Jam, I'm going to rate the games I really don't like with negative rankings...and rate a random game as 0th place.  heh heh heh


Edited by smash ball, 21 May 2014 - 07:58 PM.

  • 4

#1206 Rani_sputnik

Rani_sputnik

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 482 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 21 May 2014 - 09:59 PM

OH, now I get to try and fit more stuff into my sig!

 

I like how you say this and now your whole sig is Psymon Says :) haha. HTML5 will be good for it yah! suits well. 

 

Blake, totally do it! If you set up a blog/twitter/something then we can start following you right away :)


  • 1

My games - In DecemberBoy Goes to Space

Utilities & Extensions - FloxGM, Destroyable Terrain

Check out my website: ryanloader.me, or follow me: twitter.com/RaniSputnik


#1207 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 21 May 2014 - 10:28 PM

One very minor caveat with the 1/vote system... the difference between two places in the harmonic series (1/1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4...) get smaller and smaller between each new entry. Two 10th place votes give the same score boost as one 5th place vote. Two 40th place votes give twice as much rank score as one 39th place vote (and the same boost as one 20th place vote). And so on.

 

Probably not an issue since most people just give their top ten or so votes, but this uneven distribution could be worth keeping in mind.


  • 0

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#1208 ValidatorGator

ValidatorGator

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 110 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 21 May 2014 - 11:07 PM

Haha

Next Jam, I'm going to rate the games I really don't like with negative rankings...and rate a random game as 0th place.  heh heh heh


  • 0

#1209 GameDevDan

GameDevDan

    RIP current GMC

  • Global Moderators
  • 1453 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 22 May 2014 - 09:50 AM

One very minor caveat with the 1/vote system... the difference between two places in the harmonic series (1/1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4...) get smaller and smaller between each new entry. Two 10th place votes give the same score boost as one 5th place vote. Two 40th place votes give twice as much rank score as one 39th place vote (and the same boost as one 20th place vote). And so on.

 

Probably not an issue since most people just give their top ten or so votes, but this uneven distribution could be worth keeping in mind.

 

This effect is *kind of* offset by the fact that the difference gets worse the further down you go *but* it is likely to be countered by the fact that the user has voted for a lot of games.

 

e.g. You said two 40th place votes count twice as much as one 39th place vote, but there's a good chance that both players rating that many games rated both of the games in the scenario. So they each get a fair shout. I don't know if that made sense the way I wrote it, but it seems alright in my head.

 

Anyway, I know it's not perfect so any other suggestions are perfectly welcome. I'll get around to making that discussion topic some time soon... :whistling:


  • 2

See you all on the other side.

Back & share :)


#1210 Shadowrend

Shadowrend

    Master of Shadows

  • GMC Member
  • 3071 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 22 May 2014 - 11:11 AM

Well then simply just use Sheen-O-Meter™ to rate the games.

 

http://gamejolt.com/...-o-meter/21416/


  • 0





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: chat